Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
R.N.Sahay and Surinder Sarup JJ.
Jagarnath Mahto
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No. 181 of 1995 ;
Decided On : FEBRUARY 02, 1996
CRIMINAL LAW - Preventive Detention - Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 - Sec. 2(i)(c) - Definition of "anti-social element" - Interpretation - Habitual commission of offences - Isolated and personal acts - Delay in disposal of representation - Effect on validity of detention order.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, an active trade union worker and Secretary of Bermo Block of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, challenged his detention under the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981, on grounds of (i) not falling within the definition of "anti-social element," (ii) inordinate delay in disposing of his representation, and (iii) mala fide detention to prevent trade union activities.
Finding of the Court:
1. The definition of "anti-social element" under Sec. 2(i)(c) of the Act requires habitual commission of offences, not isolated and personal acts. 2. Unexplained delay in considering the detenu's representation renders the detention order invalid. 3. The grounds for detention, based on allegations in five criminal cases against the petitioner, did not adversely affect public order and were insufficient to establish him as an "anti-social element." 4. The detention order was passed in flagrant abuse of power.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner's acts fell within the definition of "anti-social element" under Sec. 2(i)(c) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981. 2. Whether the delay in disposing of the petitioner's representation rendered the detention order invalid. 3. Whether the detention order was passed mala fide to prevent the petitioner from carrying out his trade union activities.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Supreme Court's interpretation in Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar was applied, holding that habitual commission of offences, not isolated and personal acts, is required to establish an "anti-social element." 2. Unexplained delay in considering the detenu's representation renders the detention order invalid, as per the Supreme Court's rulings in Khairul Haque v. State of West Bengal and Jai Narain Shukul v. State of West Bengal. 3. The grounds for detention, based on allegations in five criminal cases against the petitioner, did not adversely affect public order and were insufficient to establish him as an "anti-social element." 4. The detention order was passed in flagrant abuse of power, as it was based on distorted facts and allegations.
Final Decision: The petitioner's detention was quashed due to the following reasons: (i) the grounds for detention did not establish him as an "anti-social element," (ii) there was an inordinate delay in disposing of his representation, and (iii) the detention order was passed in flagrant abuse of power.
R.N.Sahay, J.
1. In this application for a writ of hebeas corpus the detenu petitioner who is detained in Chas Jail vide detention order dated 20.8.1995 passed by the District Magistrate, Bokaro purporting to be under Sec. 12(2) of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (hereinafter it shall be referred to as the Act), has challenged the validity of detention mainly on three grounds.
2. The Ist ground is that he does not come within the definition of "anti social element" as defined in Sec. 2(i)(c) of the Act. The second ground of challenge is there has been inordinate delay of 43 days in disposing of his representation which by itself renders detention illegal. The third ground is the detention order has been passed mala fide to prevent him from carrying on his trade union activities.
3. The petitioner is the Secretary of Bermo Block of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (Mardi), a registered political party by the Election Commission of India. He is also a active member of Trade Union Jharkhand Colliery Shramik Union a registered Trade Union under the Trade Union Act. The field of the activity of the petitioner is within the Bermo Block of Bokaro district where Bhandaridah Refractoriness Ltd., a Government of India Undertaking, Chandrapura Thermal Power Station of Damodar Valley Corporation and the Collieries of Dhori, Kargali, Kathara areas of Central Coal-fields Ltd. a Government of India undertaking are situated. The petitioner contends that he raises voice of labourers, displaced persons and the oppressed class of people living peacefully and following the Rules and Regulations of the Trade Union and agitates matters as prescribed by law. He always highlighted the corruption of officials of Bharat Refractories Ltd. at Bhandaridah, Damodar Valley Corporation etc.
4. The petitioner lodged a case with Chandrapura P.S. being Chandrapura P.S. Case No. 043/95 under Secs. 120-B/379/206/409 of the Indian Penal Code against Shri J.P. Sultania Additional General Manager, Bihar Refractories Ltd. at Bhandaridah, Shri S.K. Chakravorty, Deputy Manager (Raw materials) and others. This case was instituted on 17.6.1995. The petitioner was arrested on 21.8.1995 at 9.30 a.m. following the impugned detention order by chandrapura police from his party office. The petitioner alleges that after serving detention order, dated 21.8.1995 he was kept in police custody for more than 24 hours. He was sent to jail custody after 50 hours in police custody. The petitioner has further alleged that he was assaulted by the police while in custody. He was sent to Chas Jail on 23.8.1995 at 11.30 a.m.
5. The petition was served the grounds of detention (Annexure-3) on 24.8.1995.
The aforesaid order reproduced below: (1) On 22.2.1994 at about 10.50 a.m. the subject went to the office of the Shri Prabhat Kumar Singh, Executive Engineer (C) C.T.P.S. Chandrapura and started shouting at the top of his voice near his office. Hearing the noise, Shri Singh peeped from the widow of his chamber and found Shri Jagarnath Mahto yelling at the top of his choice. All of a sudden the subject along with his one associate entered forcibly in the chamber of Shri Prabhat Kumar Singh and started abusing attaching and manhandling him very badly. This act of the detenu in broad day light, where large number of the staff and other workers were present created great panic and alarm in and around the area in general and family members of Shri P.K. Singh, Executive Engineer (C) in particular. The office staff and others present in the office started running helter and shelter for the safety of their lives. This adversely affected public, order. Chandrapura P.S. Case No,. 17/94 dated 22.2.1994 under Secs. 323, 353, 448, 504, I.P.C has been registered in this connection and charge sheet No. 12/94 has already been submitted against the subject. (Copy of F.I.R. of Chandrapura P.S. Case No. 17/94 enclosed).
(2) On 3.3.1994 at about 5.15 p.m. the subject along with his associates forcibly restra
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
